FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / RUGBY /  SA Players of the week - Super 15 - Round 10

SA Players of the week - Super 15 - Round 10

Started by clevermike14 REPLIES262 VIEWS· 19 Apr 2015, 07:03
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
19 Apr 2015, 07:03
#1
19 Apr 2015, 07:03#1

My personal view on the deserving starting players this week are as follows:-


15  Jesse Kriel

14  Francois Hougaard

13  Juan de Jongh

12  Damian de Allende

11  Ryno Benjamin

10  Handre Pollard

  9  Cobus Reinach

  8  Willie Britz

  7  Schalk Burger

  6  Marcell Coetzee

  5  Ruan Botha

  4  Eben Etzebeth

  3  Frans Malherbe

  2  Franco Marais

  1  Tendai Mtawarire


Strauss, Alberts and Esterhuizen came close - but the all round games of the above were better.  Compared to his showing in the previous games - the performance of Burger Odendaal was a bit disappointing. 



SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
20 Apr 2015, 11:51
#2
20 Apr 2015, 11:51#2

Mine would be:


15. Kriel 14. Hougaard 13. Sadie 12. de Allende 11. Basson 10. Pollard 9. Paige 1. Kitshoff 2. Strauss 3. Malherbe 4. Etzebeth 5. Ruan Botha 6. Coetzee 7. du Plessis 8. Carr

CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
20 Apr 2015, 12:09
#3
20 Apr 2015, 12:09#3
 We only differ on 4 players - that is a bloody record.  Just a bit of advice -  Du Plessis is a hard worker - a lock but definitely not a loosie.  He is good in strong ball carries - but has a low tackle count for  a loosie and disappears when it comes to ball protection and recovery.  Please note that Du Plessis played for 80 - 48 minutes on the flank and the rest as a lock.   Botha came in as a 7 - played for 32 minutes and made more tackles than Du Plessis did for 80 minutes.
SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
20 Apr 2015, 12:32
#4
20 Apr 2015, 12:32#4

Oh stop speaking rubbish you clown......du Plessis made 12 tackles you fool......that is plenty for any player......how stupid are you?


Ball protection.......do you fucking know what that is huh?


If he is not protecting the ball, he would be conceding turnovers......do you ACTUALLY know what you are talking about?  

CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
20 Apr 2015, 12:40
#5
20 Apr 2015, 12:40#5
 You obviously do not know what ball protection is.  It is not the tackled player who protects his own ball - it is other players who have to protect the ball and prevent turnovers.   It is when other players are tackled that Du Plessis is not in evidence to protect balls.
Do you understand English or just refuse to understand it.  Du Plessis played for 48 minutes at 7 and for a further 32 minutes at 4.  In that time he made less tackles than Botha did in 32 minutes at 7.  A tackle count of 12 is low for a loosie - leave alone for a loosie who also played 32 minutes at lock.
SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
20 Apr 2015, 12:46
#6
20 Apr 2015, 12:46#6

Fuck you are so thick.......do you honestly think a guy at 2.01m and over 120kg is going to be the first to the breakdown to protect the ball........its not the job of a 7 you clown.....that's the job of your 6.......his role is to arrive a little later and clear out rucks etc......which he is great at.......do you actually know anything about this great game?

BL
bluebok
Pro3,977 posts
BL
bluebokPro3,977 posts
20 Apr 2015, 13:35
#7
20 Apr 2015, 13:35#7
Saff, I like your explanation of what is to be expected of a big tall rugby player. I think what you have explained above pretty much sums up why Mikes expectations of Alberts are unreasonable. That said, maybe take it easy on old Mike! By your responses it sounds like you really hate the guy! 
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
20 Apr 2015, 13:49
#8
20 Apr 2015, 13:49#8
 Why is it the job of Labuschagne and to a lesser extent Botha - and not the job of Du Plessis and Alberts?  It is the integral part of the job of loosies and to make out that certain players are exempt from it is stupid.  Wake up to reality - you have obviously got a wrong impression all along and now comes up with BS.
    
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
20 Apr 2015, 14:03
#9
20 Apr 2015, 14:03#9
 Bluebok
Sorry to differ from you - but a loosie who cannot protect breakdown balls and recover same is not a loosies backside.   You cannot have loosies that merely duplicate the work of locks and other Tight 5 players  - whether the loosie concerned is a 7 or not.
Dave and I know each other personally and is generally on good terms.  i can assure you he does not hate me - neither do I dislike him.  It is just our way of differing on rugby issues.
The general misconception in SA is that a number 7 loosie must be a cross between a lock and a prop forward - as slow as a carthorse - and that makes certain players in that position totally ineffective.   Basically we pay dearly for that in tests.   Alberts was a serious letdown in the Ellis Park test in 2013, where he totally missed a tackle on Read - similar to the miss on Paige on Saturday.  Add to that he fell over his own feet when Smith was tackled and landed right in front of him five meters out and he could not prevent the AB's to recover the ball - leading to another try by them.
Sorry to differ - but that kind of selection of a 7 is confined to SA and is costing us dearly in loss pace and deficient defence.  We have two slow loosies and even our normal opensideres are slow compared to players from other countries.  We need at least two medium paced loosies and can do with one slow one - but two slow ones are one too many.               
 
SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
20 Apr 2015, 14:04
#10
20 Apr 2015, 14:04#10

Because in effect Botha and Labs are not your classical 7's.......they are both better suited to 8 or 6.....are quicker and therefore more effective in getting to the breakdown first.


Teams generally play big guys at 7, lads that are slightly smaller than locks but better athletes.....their jobs are to impose themselves physically both on attack and defensively....... so in your little world all 3 loosies have effectively the same role......and you say I have the wrong impression........this is a serious question.......do you actually know the game? 

CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
20 Apr 2015, 14:07
#11
20 Apr 2015, 14:07#11
Dave
Look at the explanation I gave to Bluebok.  This classical story about no 7 selections is out and out BS.  Why are we alone in that kind of thing and other countries laugh at us and their players  run past the slow paced players like they are not there.  
MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
20 Apr 2015, 14:47
#12
20 Apr 2015, 14:47#12
Ruan Botha had a pretty awful game at lock....lost his lineout ball twice and coughed up the ball in sight of the opponent's  line. He looked very rusty.
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
20 Apr 2015, 14:58
#13
20 Apr 2015, 14:58#13
 Mozart
It was hard to find a proper now 5 lock this week and Botha was the best of a poor lot.  The other contenders were Wentzel, Hatting and Uys - and although all three are better than Matfield - they are hardly worth selecting for TOW .  
MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
20 Apr 2015, 15:01
#14
20 Apr 2015, 15:01#14
On the day Hatting was better. But I agree, for a country blessed with locks, it was slim pickings.  
SA
Saffolk
Captain30,741 posts
SA
Saffolk Captain30,741 posts
20 Apr 2015, 15:05
#15
20 Apr 2015, 15:05#15

Disagree, I thought Ruan Botha had a good game.


Mike you explanation to blue is a load of crap......blue knows exactly what I am talking about  

— END OF THREAD —

More from Rugby

More news